The Campaign For DA

2.09.2012

I obviously can't publish the comments on the County Commissioner story, but I appreciate those that are submitted. It's good to hear the wide-ranging feedback and the tips as well. Edit: And I'm stunned the Update author was oblivious to my press release yesterday when even WFAA Channel 8 quoted it.

Hypothetical: You are in charge of buying office supplies with a company credit card. On a Thursday, you take home a previously purchased ream of paper from your employer without permission because you need it for an urgent school project. As you intended, over the weekend you go by Office Depot and purchase an identical replacement and take it to work on Monday to replenish the paper supply. If you then mention to your employer what you did, have you "Admitted to the theft of office supplies that were purchased with a company credit card?"

Edit: I don't mind comments on the above, just limit them to the hypothetical.

Sports: I was all excited about the Baylor/Kansas game last night and then Baylor promptly got demolished. I think Kansas went on a 32-0 run or something like that. It felt like the old days. (I woke up in the middle of the night with the TV on and I was curious how Duke/North Carolina turned out. I flipped over to one of the ESPN channels just in time to catch the last one minute of a replay of the game. Wow. Duke won a last second three pointer and that North Carolina crowd went dead quiet.)

I actually told Mrs. LL I felt grumpy last night just in case I said something curt. She told me she thought I was in a good mood.

The big rumor is that there's a seven second video of Josh Hamilton doing very un-Christian like things with a girl who was not his wife in a bathroom stall during his last drinking binge. Allegedly the owner of the video is shopping it to local stations for $41,000.

I can see TMZ paying that amount but not a local news affiliate.

I wonder if the company or companies who manufactured those military drones are public. I'd like to invest in them because that has to be the way wars will be waged in the future.

The Family Pup made it back to our bed last night only to be swatted in the face by the Family Cat when he woke up this morning. (The Family Cat is kind of like the Honey Badger. Family Cat don't care.)

If you would boycott J.C. Penney because Ellen Degeneres is there spokesperson, then you are one strange bird.

Will Ferrell introduced the starting lineups last night at a NBA game and did shtick. ("At forward, #5, and he still lives with his mother . . . . ")

High school basketball Idiocracy: The Ponder and Nocona girls will play a "play-in" game in Bridgeport to win the third place of their district in order to move on to the playoffs.

In your "hypothetical" case, did you utilize the services of a subordinate, on company time, to go to your house and work on that urgent project? If so, yes, that's theft. Why is it so hard to distinguish what's simply right or wrong these days? President Clinton claims he didn't have "sex". Former Dallas City Council member Don Hill "didn't take payments". Isn't it pretty easy to conduct an internal (in our own mind) if a situation is "right or wrong"? Ok, now for some bigger news (beat Liberally Lean to the punch!). Khloe Kardashian was in Boyd at the exotic animal zoo!!

Yes, you have admitted to the theft of office supplies that were purchased with a company credit card. You are in the same breath told you employer that you replaced the supplies 4 days later. The employer is left to wonder if you have shared this out of guilty feelings or has someone discovered it and is about to tell on you. You may not be trusted again. An employee should ask permission to borrow or in some cases purchase items from an employer. Final answer..yes you admitted to theft of office supplies.

Re the hypothetical: Multistate Bar Examination poses similar question and the answer is always "no, as the facts do not demonstrate an intent to steal the (in this case) paper and intent is a specific element of the alleged crime...all states have different interpretations, and Texas may or may not fall in line with this general view.

Josh Hamilton will be traded this saeson. If the Rangers wanted to keep him, he would be signed by now. They know he has had more than 2 incidents. He's only been outed twice with photo's and video. The Rangers are just trying to keep some trade value. This latest incident is all that is keeping him around for spring training. I just hope he stays healthy long enough to be traded.

Regarding your hypothetical… Technically speaking, I think the employee admitted to “theft.” However, I wouldn’t think most employers would label it “theft.” It might violate policy at some companies. At companies without a specific policy, if it was perceived by the employer as a problem, I think a reasonable response would be, “Don’t do that again,” or, “Get permission first.”

I’ve worked for several small companies where that scenario wouldn’t be an issue. I’ve also worked for the federal government, where that scenario could be a big deal.

Of course it's theft. You don't have to have an intent to commit theft, you just have to have an intent to deprive the owner of the specific property.

In your hypo, the fact that you intended to later "cure" the theft by returning some other equivalent property doesn't negate the fact that you took the paper from the company owner, and you intended to consume that paper for your own benefit.

I don't think the fungible nature of the paper turns that into a "I was borrowing it and didn't intend to keep it." Of course you intended to keep it (or at least not return it) -- and the fact that you admitted that you planned to give back some other equivalent paper doesn't pull you out of theft in Texas.

I certainly understand the issues of "no harm, no foul" and lack of intent to deprive the company of its net inventory of paper, but I don't think any of that negates the actual elements of the criminal offense -- assuming that in your hypothetical a bunch of lawmen showed up with a warrant to seize the paper you took and everybody's looking to make this a criminal issue for political or other reasons.

Sucks if you're that hypothetical guy, but certain jobs carry an increased duty to be sure you're not crossing any lines.

I use my American Express card before all others. And it looks like my wife and I will be shopping at JC Penney a lot more now. I'm proud those companies are standing up to the hating bigots out there.

Barry, everything from your ancestral beliefs is being modified in your value system. I guess all the people past one generation in your family tree were strange birds.

The Judea-Christian beliefs that were respected for thousand of years are being changed and reinterpreted by the present generation. The present generation has reached such a level of intelligence that they believe the Bible to be a ferry tale. Or through their superior intellect they are able to demonstrate that it says what they would like it to say to be in line with their perverted lifestyle.

(a) A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.

(b) Appropriation of property is unlawful if:

(1) it is without the owner's effective consent;

(2) the property is stolen and the actor appropriates the property knowing it was stolen by another; or

(3) property in the custody of any law enforcement agency was explicitly represented by any law enforcement agent to the actor as being stolen and the actor appropriates the property believing it was stolen by another.

Seems to me that b1 addresses the issue. I am not a lawyer so does sub section (a) have to be met in order for (b1) to be met? It would seem that if there was no consent then it is indeed unlawful despite the admission and attempt to correct.

Now the moral answer is obviously yes, it is theft. So are you posing the hypothetical from a standpoint of the law or from a moral standpoint?

Raytheon corp has been in the drone making business probably since the sixties. they get some contracts and miss out on others. seems like their current deal is a drone that is fired from a moving plane for whatever tactical advantage that gives one. stock should be trading around fifty bucks a share at the present time.

To 9:49....Really???? You closed your AmEx account and now you won't shop at JC Penney because the each hired Ellen to be their spokesperson???? Do you think that MasterCard, Visa, Sears, Macy's or any other credit card company or store doesn't have a single homosexual that works for them? You better just stay home and live in your narrow minded world.

In the hypothetical, I assume that the replacement ream was not purchased with the company credit card?

The words "purchased with a company credit card" is what concerns me. Because although taking the paper home for the project might be... what, embezzlement?... it really has nothing to do with the person's role in buying office supplies.

When he bought the initial ream with the company credit card, it went into the common office supplies stock, and THEN he/she took it home at a later date.

I mention that because it seems like it might make a difference if it goes into a criminal context. Whereas embezzlement of a ream of paper is no big deal, really, credit card abuse or whatever might mean the individual isn't bondable later on down the line when he wants to be a notary or be his grandma's guardian.

The bible is not a fairy tale. It is a bit of Christian drivel that was cobbled together over several centuries by opposing groups that spoke different languages trying to decipher oral history that was translated so many times that it is silly mythology at best.

@12:29: Well, a paperclip would technically be theft, actually.The thing is, every county in Texas would go bankrupt in a week if they started prosecuting everybody who stole a paperclip.Every business would go bankrupt if they started keeping that close of track of office supplies.

So I would guess that usually - at most - someone gets fired over office supplies.

Gotta agree with 12:09's B: comment. This is grandstanding by the conservative group. They're going after the queen bee because that's what gets the most publicity for their cause. Do they also refuse to watch the network or local affiliate that airs Ellen's program? (One of the google links describes Ellen as "a flaming homosexual". Interesting - I've never heard that phrase used for a lesbian.)Do they also call for a boycott of Pepsi products? Elton John has been doing ads for them.Does this group vett every spokesperson for every product one could possibly buy?Do they boycott everything produced by Hollywood? You can't fling a ball gag in that town without smacking somebody from the GLBT group

Warning: this portion of the rant may be contradictory to my earlier comment about "flaming".And while we're on that subject (and lest anyone incorrectly surmise I am pro-gay), let's talk about GLBT. I was reading some article the other day that mentioned the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and queer community. When did that last part get added on? Are the other labels not descriptive enough? Because it seems like all the bases were already covered. Will they keep adding letters onto their acronym until all the alphabet is used up, because certain sections of those groups don't approve of the words being used to describe them?

Triple Fake Confused (but not in the way you might think [not that there's anything wrong with that!])

hypo, schmypo,, it's theft,, plain and simple,,, the business is not a lending institution for loans until wednesday. who could he tell?? he is the top of the chain with all of the taxpayers getting the shaft..

Hypotheticaly if you sold steaks out the back door of you previous employer's store and stuck the money in your pocket you were a thief then. The same as you are if you took the ream of paper and ask the entire graphics department to do your child's project and deliver it to your house. Bottom line if it quacks like a thief it's a thief.Double fake Donald Duck...

I have two company credit cards and would never think of using them for anything other than company related business. If I did (without permission) I would be in danger of losing my job. I would not even ask for permission. I have my own credit card. Does your hypothetical not have their own card?

She sucks? Really? That's why she leads daytime television? That's why she is married to one of the most beautiful women in the world? Maybe you've just not come out of your closet yet. Jealous a little? There's nothing at all about Ellen that sucks.

I lift a roll of scotch tape from the supply room every Christmas. I also add a $10 gift card to most of my reimbursed travel meals while on the road. I spend a significant amount of my day texting and surfing the web. Many days I come back from lunch drunk. I don't leave $.50 in the refrigerator "kitty" when I get a coke. I have had sex with wife my boss' wife. Other than that, I'm a pretty good employee.

In the hypothetical, why didn't the person just stop at Walmart on his way home and buy his own paper? I really don't like the idea that he sees nothing wrong with taking what is not his, when there is a perfectly good alternative. If he will take a ream of paper from the company, instead of buying his own, I am able to guess what type of morals he has. I would tend to think that he takes shortcuts (lazy) and is not to be trusted (thief). I can only assume that the person Mr. Hypothetical told about the borrowing of the paper had already come to the same conclusion.

The fact that Mr. Hypothetical reported what he had done shows that he may not be a very good judge of character and may have difficulty distinguishing right from wrong

If you would boycott J.C. Penney because Ellen Degeneres is there spokesperson, then you are one strange bird. ??????????? Really BG??? THEIR not THERE. We don't need that Mickey Mouse shit on hear. Your too good for that. =)